AJRA HABIB Vs. R K GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision by the plaintiff against the order by which the defendant's appeal under Order 43, Rule 1(r), CPC has been allowed and the order of temporary injunction issued in favour of the plaintiff by the trial Court has been set aside.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the plaintiff was granted licence by the defendant No. 1 to run a PCO at the Railway Station by order dated 3-12-1995. She was given 1-83 m. x 1.52 m. space adjacent to the traffic booth in front of the computerised reservation office at Jabalpur on certain terms and conditions. She has been running the booth for five years at that place. On 1-11-2000 the plaintiff received a letter from the Divisional Commercial Manager informing her that her licence has been cancelled because of certain complaints against her for overcharging the customers. She was informed that the contract has been terminated and the P.C.O. would be removed from the Railway premises.

(3.) The plaintiff's case is that she was not given any notice or opportunity of hearing before the proposed action and therefore it is in violation of the principles of natural justice. It is also her case that she cannot be removed from the spot by force without following due process of law in the plaint she claimed the relief of permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from removing the P.C.O. booth installed in the Railway premises. As usual any other relief which the Court deems fit on the facts and circumstances of the case was also prayed. The suit was filed on 6-11-2000. An application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 CPC was also filed claiming the relief of temporary injunction restraining the defendants from dispossessing the plaintiff and removing the PCO booth. An application under S. 80(2) CPC was also filed for dispensing with the notice under S. 80, CPC.